Assassinator
Posts: 479
Joined: Nov. 2007
|
[Graffiti moved to Bathroom Wall. -Admin]
That has to do with the history of the world Ftk, and goes further then just the fact that you don't master those anthropological techniques. It's about how you talk about it, with a certain air. That fact that you have no idea how those things are established, doesn't mean it's impossible or illogical. You just don't understand jack shit about it. Is that a problem? No, a grand majority doesn't. The problem is the assumptions you make based upon that lack of knowledge (wich is, again, by itself not such a big of a problem). And that is, without any softness, a plain dumb thing to do, and it's not appreciated. It's like you really don't care about the skills and knowledge the scientists have about these subjects, and you only care about your own opinion and not the actual science behind it. This is not about questioning Darwinism nor about worldviews. This is about how you treat science and knowledge, the way you talked about Tiktaalik although you lack any knowledge about the subject, showed a certain air of arrogance. Thát's what's hated here by certain people.
People are starting to make predictions based on experiences with you in the past.
@ Rilke's Granddaughter:
Now you may think the question does not matter, I'm still véry curious about the answer on that question (and I still think Ftk is, but call me naďve) from any expert (wich we apperantly have here  ).
Please, fire away! At least do it for meeee *puts on puppy eyes*
|
